PDA

View Full Version : RealOne and ProTools?


arn
May 16, 2002, 08:23 PM
For users waiting for RealOne (http://www.realone.com/) for Mac OS X, Doug Mann provides this response to his inquiries regarding RealOne for Mac OS X: "sometime at the end of this year, or in the early part of next year".

Not the most encouraging response...

However, Pro Audio users may be pleased with this rumor... reportedly, DigiWorld (http://www.digidesign.com/events/events.cfm?type=3) on May 31-June 1 will be the venue for Pro Tools for OS X's announcement... with a release it in following three months...

Beyond this, the most official information available seems to be this thread at Digi User Conference:

"We can tell you that it will be sometime this year, but as it states on the front page of the compatibility documents, an expected release date has not been announced."

and then,

"An entire engineering group has been working on Pro Tools for OS X for literally years. It is not a minor project or a low priority."

Finally, one user confirms that Apple's new strategy on product releases is a "once it's ready, it will be released" policy... rather than save up announcements for major Mac Expos.

jelloshotsrule
May 16, 2002, 08:44 PM
well basically, the more stuff that's released for os x the better. the less reason people have to stick with 9...

doesn't surprise me that real is slow. their app blows. too bad it's used so commonly on the web... ahh.

MOM
May 16, 2002, 09:01 PM
Originally posted by arn

Finally, one user confirms that Apple's new strategy on product releases is a "once it's ready, it will be released" policy... rather than save up announcements for major Mac Expos.

Apple's policy in the last year seems to be to keep a presence in the media as much as possible by releasing products and updates every couple of months. I think its working because they get a lot of press given their overall low percentage of the PC market.

MOM

djcobb44
May 16, 2002, 09:14 PM
So much for getting rid of classic.

firewire2001
May 16, 2002, 09:33 PM
hey, jus wondering..

does real really cap off all developer stuff? i mean.. why cant apple develop a way of reading rm files? just a thought...

bakdai
May 16, 2002, 09:53 PM
RealOne might not be coming right, but Real Player is a different story.....right? I hope so. I really hate real player under classic.

TyleRomeo
May 16, 2002, 10:20 PM
Pro Tools for OS X would be great so then sound card companies can start releasing OS X based sound cards and i'll be very happy.

edenwaith
May 16, 2002, 11:02 PM
Once upon a year, I used to use RealPlayer quite a bit, but Real seems to have gone dead in the water. If they are going to stick their fingers up their butts and twiddle them while taking three seconds short of FOREVER to come out with an OS X version of RealOne, well...I hope that the company dies a terribly horrible death. Cripes, even MS released a OS X version of their Media Player.

But, in the end, pretty much everything I view is in QuickTime, and if it isn't, then I don't even bother, it's not important enough if the [censored] can't support QT, also.

Good to see Pro Tools will be making it to X. I tried out a few other sound programs, but nothing quite met what I was looking for, so I'm hoping Pro Tools will be able to provide that for me.

Scab Cake
May 17, 2002, 02:29 AM
I know a guy who endorses Digidesign and he told me that Pro Tools will be released for OS X in three months. It will be announced at DigiWorld, and be multithreaded to take advantage of multiple processors. I will find out more as I talk more to him. Basically he said that it's amazing. I can't wait for it to come out as it is the only reason I still have OS 9 installed on my computer. Once Pro Tools is out for X, I'm going X only. w00t!!!

Screw realplayer. I have plenty of realmedia files, but oh well. It's the principle behind getting rid of OS 9 that matters. :)

j763
May 17, 2002, 02:59 AM
Real really sucks... RealOne is the new name for realplayer btw... I thought Apple had a deal of some description with Real... If they could only convince Real to allow them to put capabilities for playing rm files into qt6 (not for the wintel version -- just for the mac version), qt6 would RULE! i hate those ********** AVI, ASF, RM and other propriatary formats -- even mov... if only everyone used mpg and mpegla were a bit more reasonable when it comes to licensing... In the meantime, if someone knows of a good media converter program, please post info here...

fbcfabric
May 17, 2002, 06:38 AM
Pro Tools is no doubt a nice app, and when running in OSX i am fully prepared to want it more than ever, but Logic is a much bigger better and badder package if you dont have a few thousand to spend on hardware to go with pro tools...

Logic 5 for X is supposed to be coming about soon from what i have read ("summer"), and it has always supported 2 processors and AltiVec (well since version 4.x anyway)

if you havent had the pleasure, i urge you to check it out, altho it can be a lil confusing right from the getgo - if you stick with it, it all becomes obvious in the end

the only advantage Pro Tools has over Logic, is that you can download a free version of Pro Tools [lite] and use it for as long as you like with very few limitations. where as you have to pay for a lite version of logic. that shows real belief in your product if you ask me...

anyway, thanks for listening... you're doing a bang up job arn... keep it up mate.

gopher
May 17, 2002, 07:04 AM
I've practically given up on Real. First they promise this spring, and spring is almost over. Now they say not till the end of the year. They are about as bad as Quark. If you know a station that doesn't use Windows Media or Quicktime, try to convince them to at least use those. Streaming media won't catch on until they stop treating us as second class citizens. Look at what "The Washington Post" did yesterday on Maccentral.

Edge100
May 17, 2002, 07:10 AM
I agree. Logic is a wonderful program. A little hard to grasp at first, but once you do, it blows the doors off of any other DAW out there (inc. Cubase, Nuendo, Digital Performer).

That said, Logic really isnt meant for the same thing ProTools is. They should be used together. Logic is a wonderful compositional tool with great MIDI support and some excellent audio stuff too (not the least of which is that it is compatible with ProTools hardware). ProTools, on the other hand, is simply a recording tool. Very basic MIDI but top notch audio. Compose in Logic. Engineer in ProTools.

Sorry for getting off topic. ProTools for X is akin to Photoshop for X in that it will bring some very professional stuff over to the OS X platform. I'm not a ProTools user but I'm sure this will lead the way for other audio developers to port their stuff over (Native Instruments, I'm taking to YOU!)

All in all, it should be a good year for audio on OS X.

Tue12
May 17, 2002, 07:28 AM
Finally, one user confirms that Apple's new strategy on product releases is a "once it's ready, it will be released" policy... rather than save up announcements for major Mac Expos.


It's obvious why this is their new policy. Apple hardware upgrades for the foreseable future will be so underwhelming, Steve would get tomatoed on stage. :)

I can see it now, "we have this new insanely great 1.1Ghz!!! PowerMac using DDR!!! being choked on a CPU bus half it's bandwidth! Insanely great, isn't it!? <tomatoe wizzes by his head....zing....zing........zing....> :D

drastik
May 17, 2002, 08:54 AM
Originally posted by fbcfabric

the only advantage Pro Tools has over Logic, is that you can download a free version of Pro Tools [lite] and use it for as long as you like with very few limitations. where as you have to pay for a lite version of logic. that shows real belief in your product if you ask me...


You said it right on with the Free part. I use Logic a little, and I use Cubase for the VST, but ProTools is still my mix down baby. Even with limited tracks in free, its the best software around. I feel this way, and many who think like me as well, because I've had formal engineering training, and any serious university (and almost every studio) uses ProTools. The learning curve is taken right out of the ball game. I love that Digidesign offers a free version of what would (untill Digi001 and Mbox) be other wise way too pricey. I'd love a twenty grand ProTools rig, but I'd also like ten xserves. ;)

Now that Tools is comming to X, I can finally abandon 9 (as soon as Lexar gets drivers for my card reader working!!!!!);)

nerveosu
May 17, 2002, 09:37 AM
Real is shooting themselves in the foot. At this point they need to do all they can to keep web developers using thier codecs.

Real server costs $1k+ (windows media server and QT server are free)

They make you pay for content on thier site (Windows media and QT don't)

And now they don't support OS X... why would I or (any other person) ever choose a codec that doesn't work well on windows, OS 9 and OS X when QT and Windows media work fine?

Most of this is because this is because web streaming media is all they do... I don't see how they will make it.

-bill

Taft
May 17, 2002, 10:30 AM
All I can say is, thank gods!! We desperately need pro audio tools on OS X. I've been recording at a friend's place lately because I refuse to go back to OS 9. I long for the day that I can record natively under OS X at home. Its been too long coming.

Taft

barkmonster
May 17, 2002, 11:07 AM
The Digi001 factory bundle looks incredible to me, I started with protools free and moved up to a ToolBox XP system late last year, There's quite a few plug-ins I'd like to buy but all added up, I'd be cheaper buying a whole new mac and the Digi001 factory, then I'd get more inputs, a way faster mac than my beige G3 and all those plug-ins I can't afford to buy.

I imagine Digidesign will be making their own plug-ins OS X compatable from the start when they release Protools X, that's not my concern at all, it's all those other companies that make plug-ins, I'd like to buy later, McDSP filterbank is something that appeals to me for instance, apart from the hefty price and the fact I might not see an OS X native version for quite a while.

I'd love to save a bit and buy an older dual model too, that way I'll get a totally amazing protools LE system and performance to match but I won't have to look at spending too much on the mac because a dual 533 or 800 would do.

gopher
May 17, 2002, 01:56 PM
First make a Realplayer for Mac OS X. Too many radio stations rely on that for streaming music, and too few use alternative formats like Quicktime and Windows Mediaplayer and MP3.

I had hoped they'd release it this spring, but it seems not.

bakdai
May 17, 2002, 02:09 PM
So is Real Player the same as RealOne? B/c if it is, then that is disappointing. I had heard May, then June was the time when Real Player X would be released.

katchow
May 17, 2002, 02:32 PM
how does protools work? i'm getting ready to by a laptop (ibook, maybe tibook)...anyway, i want to take it to band practices and record what we play...we currently record into a four track to seperate all our instruments so we can mix later if we liked what we played...so, how can you record into a laptop with these channels seperated? How can the computer record multi-tracks simultaneously? the tracks need to be seperated so i can play around w/ them later on (volume, effects, what not)...i imagine i need additional equipment...but even then i dont understand how the tracks get seperated...it always go through one input into the computer eventually...would you have to record each track seperately?

excuse my ignorance...i know this probably sounds silly to most of you
katchow

sorry if this is a bit off-topic

Nebrie
May 17, 2002, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by bakdai
So is Real Player the same as RealOne? B/c if it is, then that is disappointing. I had heard May, then June was the time when Real Player X would be released.

Yes they are exactly the same now. Too bad even Linux has a version out while the Mac won't get one for a long time.

jbirk5000
May 17, 2002, 03:01 PM
Originally posted by TyleRomeo
Pro Tools for OS X would be great so then sound card companies can start releasing OS X based sound cards and i'll be very happy.


that would be great except for the fact that Digi software only works with Digi hardware...

barkmonster
May 17, 2002, 03:14 PM
Unfortunately, Digidesign decided 2 inputs was enough for the portable protools system, the USB Mbox has 2 very high quality mic pres, 2 standard line level inputs and 2 digital inputs, it also has a headphone socket and both digital and analogue outputs.

Protools is a great package, even if you're a beginner it's pretty easy compared to the dozens of windows you have to learn the function of with Cubase and the like.

You could record 2 mono tracks at once and then overdub more onto of then with protools LE and an Mbox, if you want any more inputs you'd need to have quite a lot of cash to go the protools route. Basically what you'd need is this:

TiBook (It's the only laptop in apple's range with a PC card slot)
Magma portable PCI expansion system (needs a PC card slot on the host laptop to work)
Digidesign Digi001 system (needs a PCI card slot, hence the TiBook and Magma system)

All that lot would come to a hell of lot I'm not even going to work out it's that much, just the expansion box and digi001 would run to the best part of 1,200 at least.

There are alternative audio recording systems that will work with 3rd part USB and Firewire interfaces, some of the interfaces have multiple inputs like you need but I believe Bias Deck is a good system if you're not into the idea of learning or buying cubase, logic or digital performer.

DavidRavenMoon
May 17, 2002, 06:07 PM
Originally posted by TyleRomeo
Pro Tools for OS X would be great so then sound card companies can start releasing OS X based sound cards and i'll be very happy.

M-Audio already has drivers out for most of their sound cards. I use an Audiophile 2496, and the driver works great! I'm adding an M-Audio R-BUS card to link to my Roland VM-3100Pro, and the same driver works for that card too.

So far the only native X app I use is Peak DV.

I run Cubase VST in OS 9, but Steinberg will have an OS X version of Cubase SX this summer.

I think OS X is going to be a great OS for music, even better than OS 9 has been, and if the new Apple hardware is anything like the Xserver, we have some fast iron coming! :)

DavidRavenMoon
May 17, 2002, 06:21 PM
Originally posted by barkmonster
I believe Bias Deck is a good system if you're not into the idea of learning or buying cubase, logic or digital performer.

Deck is a great program. DECK II was my main audio program for years (since right before Macromedia bought it from OSC).

DECK was the original software that came with DigiDesign systems, but when Macs got native SoundManager support, OSC made it run without the Digi cards, and Digi made ProTools to replace it.

The one downside of Deck is it doesn't do MIDI sequencing. It synchs up with Metro (now owned by Cakewalk) to handle the MIDI functions. This is a pain to work with, since your MIDI tracks and your audio tracks are in two separate programs! Metro also has some audio recording ability now too.

I finally ended up switching to Cubase VST. I looked at the Digi 001 system, but the version of ProTools that comes with it has weak MIDI compared to Cubase, and I liked the idea of all the VST plug-ins and instruments on the market. Also at the time Steinberg's ASIO made it easy to find an inexpensive sound card to use with the Mac. BIAS was taking too long to get anything but KORG 1212 support for Deck.

Still, if you are mainly doing multitrack audio recording, deck is as easy to use as a tape deck and has some very powerful editing features.

bonehead
May 19, 2002, 01:42 PM
Any number of apps will let you record multiple tracks simultaneously, how many depends on the program and your cpu. The hardware interface you buy will determine the number of separate inputs. Tascam makes 2 products that are both USB audio interfaces and control surfaces and they come with Cubasis, a stripped down version of Cubase. M-Audio makes the Audiosport Quattro, a USB interfce which has four inputs but no mic preamps. MOTU makes an 8 channel FireWire interface and it comes with audio recording software. Check out sweetwater.com or musiciansfriend.com for prices and go to harmony-central.com for reviews. Also check back issues of EQ or Electronic Musician for reviews. The above mentioned products have all come out in the last year and a half and have been reviewed by most of the gear mags.

If you already have a mixer (Mackie 1202 or something), you could get away with the Audiosport (it's the cheapest). The Tascam is appealing because it has faders and you can twiddle physical knobs to move your onscreen ones. I'm not sure about the quality of their converters though. The MOTU 828 is the most expensive (around $750) but it has eight inputs and mic pre's.

gbox@wanadoo.fr
May 19, 2002, 05:19 PM
I think nobody focused on the real big thing : Protools multi-processor support.
Actually (as it's the case for me), you gotta disable one CPU if you want to use DAE (Protools audio engine), even if you're using a protools system (cards & interfaces) with other softwares (like Logic), losting all the native power of 2 CPUs for native plug-ins.

Personally, i really can't wait for it as it's the major problem of my rig...
Please, hurry up!!!!!!!!!!!!

Taft
May 19, 2002, 08:13 PM
Originally posted by bonehead
Any number of apps will let you record multiple tracks simultaneously, how many depends on the program and your cpu. The hardware interface you buy will determine the number of separate inputs. Tascam makes 2 products that are both USB audio interfaces and control surfaces and they come with Cubasis, a stripped down version of Cubase. M-Audio makes the Audiosport Quattro, a USB interfce which has four inputs but no mic preamps. MOTU makes an 8 channel FireWire interface and it comes with audio recording software. Check out sweetwater.com or musiciansfriend.com for prices and go to harmony-central.com for reviews. Also check back issues of EQ or Electronic Musician for reviews. The above mentioned products have all come out in the last year and a half and have been reviewed by most of the gear mags.

If you already have a mixer (Mackie 1202 or something), you could get away with the Audiosport (it's the cheapest). The Tascam is appealing because it has faders and you can twiddle physical knobs to move your onscreen ones. I'm not sure about the quality of their converters though. The MOTU 828 is the most expensive (around $750) but it has eight inputs and mic pre's.

Thats a sweet list of converters!!! I haven't seen a few of these before. Thanks!!

Taft

barkmonster
May 20, 2002, 04:25 PM
I think nobody focused on the real big thing : Protools multi-processor support.
Actually (as it's the case for me), you gotta disable one CPU if you want to use DAE (Protools audio engine), even if you're using a protools system (cards & interfaces) with other softwares (like Logic)

I'm never going to afford to move up to a TDM system but I think it's going to be a major advantage to both LE and TDM users.

There's plenty of posts on the DUC from people who've had no problems running Protools LE on a dual CPU G4 without disabling anything. Infact I was looking at dual G4 and Unity Session as being my next major purchase. This still wouldn't be the ideal system because there would still be a lot of CPU time going to waste under OS 9.

The thing with Protools X is you'll literally have 200% of the CPU power of the OS 9 version, purely for protools. With the new Quartz Extreme taking most of strain of the GUI off the CPU, It wouldn't be out of the question for a dual G4 800 to match the DSP power of a Protools|24 Mix+ system. I also imagine with the Xserver having over 500Mb/s on the PCI bus, running a bandwidth hungry graphics card might not interfere with TDM systems either, you'd get the best of both worlds with TDM and a dual G4 under OS X 10.2

The one worrying thing is that an 800Mhz G4 can handle about 25% of the DSP power of a Protools|HD system judging by some of the results of a test session I put up earlier in the year. Imagine what sort of power you'd be looking at with a dual 1.2Ghz model with DDR and protools using ALL available CPU power, not just 85% of the first CPU. Concidering how a HD system is twice as fast as a Mix+, that would make the older protools|24 systems (single card systems at least) no faster than host based.

Protools X is good for everybody, at least everybody who's already using one of the current protools systems.

To be honest with you I'm looking forward to the Protools X upgrade more than whatever apple come up with next for towers, if MP support really does give Protools LE the huge speed kick it needs, I'll just be shopping round for a used dual 800 or dual Ghz G4 if I can stretch to it and then I'll be happy for years personally.